regfootball

we need to weed the Japanese makers down, nissan, toyota group, honda will even be lucky to remain apart from USA Mazda is being valiant but they will get absorbed in ten years too

the non off road merc wagon is pretty nice, and that sells to a well to do but small demographic, which is why they bring that over. the audi a6 allroad days are over, i think. but if merc thinks they call sell 800 of them a year, then sure.

^^^^^ bing. winner.

I've read to stay away from most early chrysler products with that 9 speed auto. Horror stories abound on forums. Those who may not want an Altima, get this.... 2017 Sentra SR 1.6 turbo plus choice of stick sounds crazy but I would consider one http://nissannews.com/en-US/nissan/usa/presskits/us-2017-nissan-sentra-sr-turbo-press-kit/photos/2017-nissan-sentra-sr-turbo-53

original escape hybrid sold really well in the US. It was a mistake for Ford to discontinue it in 2013.

it's not just diesel they are over regulating. Globally the taxes and regs have created things like a 1.0 litre three turbo in a Ford Mondeo in Europe. etc. The crossroads in powertrain development Drew alludes to in my mind is the push and pull, the ever increasing demands of regulation (for regulation sake now) are far exceeding the value of investment. It's ruining the auto industry. They all stepped up to the plate to make their 1.5's and tiny turbos and hybrids and 10 speed autos, now is not the time to double the requirements again. It's time to make the technology that is in play now, reliable and cost effective. We'd all be better off if they stop pussy footing and just come out and say 'all global powertrains shall be capable of either gas-electric hybrid, gas-electric hybrid plug in, or plug in hybrid propulsion. With credits given for innovation in other fuels. Let's skip over this struggle spending millions and billions making 2.0's gain 2 more mpg each product cycle when we can just flat out mandate fuel diversity and jump from a 30 mpg car to a 40 mpg car. Let's get every manufacturer deeply immersed. Create global tax incentives to entice manufacturers to join forces and engineer fewer but better powertrains. I really do think the crossroads is that we need to recognize we've got most of what we can out of pure gas powertrains. We would see more of an investment with development dollars in standardizing future electric infrastructure. Let's develop scalable battery technologies. Let's think about what our charging network is 40 years down the pipe. etc. I love diesels too, and this clearly a diesel witch hunt going on but I can see why any manufacturer would scale back on these.

holy crap. beat me to it. There's some Nissan Altima in that thing too. The Audi is more cab rearward though. Audi's been rehashing shit over and over for a long time now yet the Audiphiles think its all cutting edge stuff. I will say this. Even though this is blandmobile, it does sort of blur the distinction from sedans and liftbacks even more to the point where its tough to discern. If this sort of thing tests the waters with more liftbacks that could make it to the US i think this middle ground might become something that may bring in some folks that like sedans but are being lured by the crossover utlity thing. we may hit a cycle soon where we go back to blockier shapes and sharper lines. Just as Cadillac puts out an ovoid concept car without blades and creases.

No. Those are dealer service demos with miles on them at that price. Or 'limiteds'

having just gotten into my 16 Malibu i love that i was able to upgrade from the compact class to the midsize. To me, the midsize sedan segment is sort of the 'luxury economy class' now. You don't get punished with the small interior and sometimes lackluster and choppy ride of the small car. For our second car the midsize option is large enough to hold family, but it's a lean athletic car with good ride and handling with great fuel economy. Crossovers are all still heavy, tall, and few of them have much more than 20 mpg to offer. Midsizers can offer what is now a comparatively sporty driving experience. The Malibu with its new lighter weight feels nimble for its size. Perhaps 16 options is too many in this class now but i think to thin the herd, the brands would die off first before they would vacate a staple segment. I've said this in other threads here but I don't consider that the Malibu fulfills all that it would cannibalize the Impala. The Impala has that solid robust deluxe feel and heft that many drivers still prefer. The Malibu doesn't have that same complete feel that the Impala has. GM's classic demographic still likes large cars too. The new LaCrosse should do well. GM may keep selling more crossovers but they will still move enough of the full sizers that Malibu + Regal won't eliminate the large ones. If i had had more $$$ I certainly would have upgraded to an Impala or LaCrosse etc. If gas hits 4.50 soon and if there is another killer recession, then people will not buy 60,000 dollar crossovers that get 18 mpg as much and the midsize class will be well positioned to move buyers down in price but give great mpg and better room and space than the compacts. Let the market cycle before we predict midsizers demise. I think we need to see the crossovers split into a sports crossover class and the regular crossover class. something where you like have a crossover sitting on a Fusion chassis but it not as upright or high to sit in as an Edge. Seat H point is maybe halfway between and its got a more aggressive shape. I think a couple of the midsizers could try to spruce the market up by offering the hatch or wagon options too. Regal and Mazda6 would be great to try this. Mazda6 wagon looks good. Insignia liftback would be a very good market experiment here.

i think the auto industry as a whole is in for a slide......... Subaru is about the only 'accessible' brand that saw a meaningful increase. All things considered it looks like GM did ok

as someone who had only leased once before and now has done two leases in the last year and a half, this is what it came to for me. Usually my plan is to buy the one year old car with about 15,000 miles on it and do a five year loan. My Taurus X i bought about that way and saved big bucks off of MSRP. We ended up having to do a six year loan. We did end up paying off the six year loan. And right about at the end of that i had to put more money into it than i wanted to. And it was time for maintenance costs. And some of the dealers offered me a pittance on trade. It was paid off, it was not worth anything. The only way it was worth anything to me was to commit to owning it about 4 more years and putting a bunch more money into it (over time). I felt that money was better off getting into something newer. We leased our Chrysler van because some of that trade equity had a much greater impact into the lease. And, i would be paying far less in sales tax and interest money. A buy payment on my van would have been a couple hundred more per month. DId that mean i was buying too much? No. Car prices are off the charts. I found several examples of one and two and three year old Dodge Caravans with nothing on them that would have required me to finance six years and lots down to still get the payment near what that lease offered. Considering I never want to be stuck with a Chrysler, or had no long term desire to OWN the van...I figured I would try the lease again. When we got into the Malibu lease a couple months ago (a second vehicle), the only thing i had to put into the vehicle purchase was all the various GM incentives and a little cash. I had no desire to give someone else a bunch of cash and receive no value for it in return. I just got so much more value out of having my GM card money buy down the lease instead of barely paying for sales tax. GM card money, GM card bonus, GM bonus tag, competitive lease, standard rebate.....my incentives did not go for interest and sales tax. The residual after the three year loan is likely equal or less than what the loan payoff would be on a six year loan with a buy scenario. And i can guarantee you my payment is half of what a buy payment might have been. After three years if the market is in the tank, I can throw GM an offer to buy the lease that is less than the residual and see if they bite. If not, the buyout is probably what is a three year old used car i know the history on for less than the price of a used car on the dealer lot. I wasn't willing to drive a crappy small turd like my Cobalt again, and the only real desirable used car I wanted in the 15-18 grand price range was really a two year old Cruze (and that is being kind to that Cruze). To pay 5-6 years and still have a 350-400 payment on something like that, and have it be worth 9 grand as soon as i drive it off the lot......I'm stuck. With the Malibu and its turbo's, new chassis, and auto stop, I don't want to be stuck with it long term unless its my choice. Ford Fusion S was about the only new car I could have seen buying that was not a compact. Those could be had for around 18 grand.....just about everything else that is not a compact, you're not getting off the lot for less than 20-22 thousand. That's a lot of money in the future now to tie up when the last 7 1/2 years of recession decimated our financial plans. If you are convinced you will keep the car a long time, then buy. If you have a lot of cash and accept that you are just giving away a large chunk of it to someone else, then buy. If you drive a lot of miles you probably have to buy too. Back in 2000, we were paying a combined 600 a month for 2 car payments. I never was left much with either of those two cars in the end. In 2016, my two combined car payments are about 600 bucks a month, and a lot less of that is going to sales tax and interest. I don't know of anyone who can piece together more than 3-400 bucks a month for wheels. Most folks i know probably have car payments 2-300 a month (for not much car). And that is for a variety of metal. If you can find a decent used vehicle with 100,000 miles and still for ten grand that you can hang your hat on for five years of sort of inexpensive and trouble free driving, God bless you. Finance guy where i got the Malibu said 60-65% of business at their dealer is lease. That's a huge increase for Chevy. I drove something i was looking at for my mom at a Nissan dealer last week. He said it varies depending on model. Some 60% some 40% etc. He said Subaru has only 25% leased. Said its because it is becoming older person cash buying brand. That was hilarious because a good buddy's parents bought a LEgacy last week cash buy, older folks LOL Face it, there has been invisible inflation in this country the last 8 years. A good chunk of the population is not making much, if any more than they used to 10 years ago. Millenials start out with jobs that pay what college grads got 20 years ago. Yet a mid size family sedan is several thousand more.....look at all the car prices out there. Gas is super cheap....but how much is your rent now in the last five years? Fast food trip prices doubled in the last 5 years I am willing to bet. Pop at the convenience store is 2 bucks now.....not 1.29. Cable and cell phone bills maybe 50-75% higher. Boom in leasing is because its the only way to keep the factories making cars and being able to get people into them. In the process, it becomes a luxury. Where you may have bought a Focus with cloth seats before, now you may get something with leather....etc. You can buy into luxury more with leasing. And the car stays desirable when its turned in. The mfrs can add the new tech to the cars and pump up the MSRP to account for it quicker....and the lease return has a better chance of selling on the used market because its not a stripper. I imagine there will be a car bubble soon.......but the car mfrs should either tighten up the leasing or be prepared to take the hit on the lease turn ins. The real issue is they all need to cut back on production a bit I think. Note if you recall GM now buys back the leases and has their own system of auction now so to speak.......this gives them a chance to better fend off dumping and help keep dealers giving them the best chance to have cars new or used to make the money on and buffering some of the losses for themselves. That's another reason i am hesitant to buy........if i buy new and there is a bubble and the market tanks, look at how much more money I lose.

resale has been terrible, all this does is get new prices closer to the wholesale / trade in market. they can still charge the big bucks for the GTI's etc. though.

shouldn't be, but i get some Acura TL vibe in it. Maybe its the hofmeister kink Warming up to the overall shape, but it still doesn't say Cadillac loudly, and the front end is still weak, no presence. No bling.

Cadillac has already done the 'a7 fastback / 4 door coupe look' (this would have made a great badge engineered Saab 9-9 too)

SAVE THE CREASES

It's funny, because when i first saw the pictures of this thing, I thought, what the eff is this? Tesla is the first thing that popped into my head. Then, it's got some of the Hyundai Genesis going on. A little bit of an Acura greenhouse even. Then, Cadillac A7. And then I am like, there really isn't much traditional Cadillac going on. Front end is totally bland. Johan wants to, or thinks he can, or has been told to make Cadillac more global and exclusive. So it's interpreted as throwing the baby out with the bath water. Anytime you have a 'new design direction' it's supposed to be a stunning statement. Think Chrysler's cab forward for example, or the mid 00's new 300. This really doesn't achieve that sort of statement. Anything that was maybe positive on the Elmiraj is totally gone also. It basically is throwing out art and science. Well, it was interesting because while on vacay, in a small bodunk town we visited this wkd sat a brand new ATS coupe in that really stunning red color. So mad i didn't take a pic. If i had seen the car in profile first i would have been like 'second ever G6 coupe'. But all the bling and detailing on the car apart from its being not a spot on the car it was a stunner. PArt of the reason for that was whatever the residual leftover of the Cadillac A&S cues....the bladed front and rear (albeit moderately expressed) The vertical taillights, the highly detailed and sharp edged grille....the bombastic logo. And this is with the ATS and CTS that have the mutt styling of A&S and some weak attempt at trying to look German. (where the ATS fails the wow meter here is it's physical size just isn't large enough to convey wow like a CTS sized car could....not enough width, not enough length and wheelbase). If this had been a gen 2 CTS coupe with a similar new era eased over styling of the last CTS coupe and with a bit more rakish look I think it would have been more effective. Cadillac is having so much trouble putting a face on the cars like the CTS and CT6, and finishing the rest of the car too. Johan's probably wanting to take a dump on the traditional Cadillac fan base in every way. Jack up the prices, get rid of the old styling, rather have them be big in other countries. GM prob thinks Buick will pick up the old fan base with its lower prices, etc. At the same time, they'll give up on sedans now and stock the house with a bunch of crossovers. IMO Cadillacs biggest failures of the last 5-8 years is the ATS came out and quite simply is way too small to appeal to any customer base that would even consider Cadillac. Even those who may be lured by its performance. The new CTS went up too far in price and really with its ugly front end, wtf rear end, and confusing sides messed with the Cadillac look too much. The XTS really should have been promoted more to at least get some customers in the showroom (and yes, it's ok to have your XTS at a discount and basically offset cars like the Lexus ES). Many Cadillac customers never even knew what an XTS was, they were told the DTS was dead and nothing to replace it. The CT6 just arriving may have confused everything even more. No v8, it's long but not wide, rear lacks length and presence, and pricing is again an issue. Cadillac hasn't done anything to compete with Tesla and as for gas engines, they really could stand to have a much better 2.0 turbo. Only just now is Cadillac putting a respectable turbo 6 in their cars. And then, CUE. It would be one thing for Cadillac to price their cars way up if the cars they were selling were desirable. When you miss the mark badly with new and existing customers on styling or size or powertrains or features, and your ad campaigns suck, how are you supposed to build brand equity or expect to get big profits? ^^^^92 Seville, still the total package. My folks didn't have the STS version, they had the SLS equivalent. It's fine for Cadillac to have maybe 1 model with the four door coupe / hatch look but i hope they don't turn their whole lineup to these jellybeans. Cadillacs should have some creases, some blades, edges, angles, etc. ELR gets big thumbs up for it's styling (it just is limited to electric) and look at it's creases. Cadillacs didn't ever have hofmeister kinks like this confused thing has. I don't think Johan is going to work out the way it's been going.

on a drive back from a vacay this evening, a new civic clung to me and it decided to slow down and speed up for 2 hours while my cruise was set at 72 mph. i really do like the Civic except the styling is wearing on me. I think they styled it well, but it's so overdone and tiring. The rear taillights are over the top (literally). Just so much going on. It's like going out to the bar for 6 hours and the music and drunk idiots never letting up. The hatch makes it worse. Civic's big flaws are interior noise, some may add CVT. I think for those that don't look at cars in depth like us here do, they'll like the styling but it's made for the younger set. It's like Honda's Grand Am, after awhile the cladding and strakes just became a cartoon. I really considered the Civic a lot before we got the Malibu recently and now I am really glad I didn't go Civic. Look at the Sentras and Corollas out there, this is still better.......

i was misled by another Gm fan site into thinking their link was functional and correct.

the current Verano is a gem and the Sport Touring package for 16 is quite nice. Someone at work has a white diamond Verano in the parking lot everyday. Sharp car. I think Buick is putting all its sport sedan / low end sedan eggs in the Regal for 2018. Should be interesting to see the result.

shapes that don't have a good ratio for length to height really suffer. The Bolt is short. And it's tall proportion is rather tall. Extra ground clearance don't help. It's not a teardrop shape, the rear end is blunt......so .32 for being a barn door is still ok. it ain't this, http://theoldmotor.com/?p=91849

Word is, build and price is up online now for 2017 Cruze hatch!!!!

New Prius is HIDEOUS. .32 on tall car like Bolt is not bad. Many sedans won't hit that yet. If bolt is a success maybe we'll get a bolt like sedan.

Dem gas cars are too complicated Betr git yerself n lectric car

Car and Driver has a new LaCrosse writeup. Looks like the perfect Barcalounger! That's ok, I don't mind... http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-buick-lacrosse-first-drive-review

ouch. should be interesting to see how this turns out.